Goals and Contents of Social Ethics Education in Korea

( Kuk Hyeon Kim ) 한국윤리학회 2015 倫理硏究 Vol.101 No.1

The aim of this paper is to discuss goals, contents, and new orientation of Social Ethics Education in Korea. For this aim, the definition of concept of social ethics, changes of learning theme of Social Ethics Education of Korean Moral Education Curriculum, and educational tasks for more effective implementation of Social Ethics Education in High School are discussed. Firstly, to define concept of Socia Ethics and Social Ethics Education focused on its constructs, aim, values, principles. Secondly, to analyze Moral Education Curriculum from The Fifth Moral Education Curriculum to Newly developing Moral Education Curriculum that will be implemented from 2018. Curriculum Analysis is focused on goal, principles, core values, objectives, and contents of Social Ethics Education on the Korean High School. Thirdly, to discuss educational tasks of Social Ethics Education such as learning materials development based on Korean ethical thought and life history or narratives of Korean which are past life experiences under unfair and corrupt social structure. The aim of Social Ethics Education has been to educate student as moral agent who has moral responsibility for making social structure fair. In Newly developing Moral Education Curriculum, Social Ethics Education on High School will be implemented through three courses such as ‘Ethics and Thought’, ‘Life and Ethics’, ‘Classics and Ethics’. They include learning theme such as a climate justice, the duty of foreign aid, terrorism and war as Global Social Ethics. And ethical inquiry and ethical reflection on morality of social structure and individual morality to groups, institutions, policies as social persons are emphasized as effective teaching and learning methods of Social Ethics Education.

Goals and contents of Social Ethics Education in Korea

김국현 한국윤리학회 2015 倫理硏究 Vol.101 No.1

The aim of this paper is to discuss goals, contents, and new orientation of Social Ethics Education in Korea. For this aim, definition of concept of social ethics, change of learning theme of Social Ethics Education of Korean Moral Education Curriculum, and educational tasks for more effective implementation of Social Ethics Education in High School are discussed. Firstly, to define concept of Social Ethics and Social Ethics Education focused on its constructs, aim, values, principles. Secondly, to analyze Moral Education Curriculum from The Fifth Moral Education Curriculum to Newly developing Moral Education Curriculum that will be implemented from 2018. Curriculum Analysis is focused on goal, principles, core values, objectives, and contents of Social Ethics Education on the Korean High School. Thirdly, to discuss educational tasks of Social Ethics Education such as learning materials development based on ethical thought and life history or narratives of Korean and State which are past life experiences under unfair and corrupt social structure. The aim of Social Ethics education has been to educate student as moral agent who has moral responsibility for making social structure fair. In Newly developing Moral Education Curriculum, Social Ethics Education on High School will be implemented through three courses as ‘Ethics and Thought’, ‘Life and Ethics’, ‘Classics and Ethics’. They include learning theme such as climate justice, the duty of foreign aid, terrorism and war as Global Social Ethics. And ethical inquiry and ethical reflection on morality of social structure and individual morality to groups, institutions, policies as social persons are emphasized as effective teaching and learning methods of Social Ethics Education.

한국의 사회복지 윤리와 철학 교과서 분석

김기덕(Kim Gi-duk) 비판과 대안을 위한 사회복지학회 2004 비판사회정책 Vol.- No.17

이 글의 목적은 현재 한국 사회복지학 관련 대학에서 사회복지윤리와 철학 (Social Work Practice Ethics) 과목의 교과서 로 사용될 목적으로 출간된 저서 및 번역서의 검토를 통하여 한국 사회복지윤리학의 연구경향을 평가해 보는 것이다. 이러한 목적을 당성하기 위하여 본 연구에서는 분석대상이 되는저서들 을크게 교과목의 개념정의, 포괄하는 윤리학 이론의 범위, 철학적 지향의 3가지 기준을가지고 분석하여 보았다. 분석의 결과 이 글에서 검토된 2권의 번역서와 5권의 국내학자들의 저서들은 약간의 편차를 보이기는 하지만, 대부분 미국식 임상사회사업중심(social work-oriented). 응용윤리성격의 규범윤리학 중심 (normative ethics-oriented). 근대적-전통적 윤리지향(modernist ethics-oriented)이라는 특정을 공유하고 있었다. 따라서 개별 사회복지사의 전문적 실천과는 구별되는 국가 및 지방정부의 사회정책 및 사회복지 서비스와 관련된 윤리적 쟁점과 논의들은 다소 소홀하게 다루어 질 수밖에 없었다. 또한 응용윤리 중심의 규범윤리학에 상대적으로 많은 논의가 할당되어, 한국 사회복지 실천과 관련된 윤리적 실태에 대한 기술윤리학적 논의 및 사회복지 윤리학자체에 대한 의미와 그 정당성에 대한 논의를 제공할 수 있는 메타 윤리학은 거의 다루어지지 못하고 있다. 그리고 대부분의 교과서들이 칸트식 의무론과 공리주의 중심의 목적론으로 대별되는 근대 윤리학에만 한정되어 논의를 소개하고 있어 최근 사회복지에 대한 대안윤리로 제시되고 있는 페미니즘 윤리학(feminist ethics), 포스트모던 윤리학(postmodern ethics). 다양한 비판 윤리이론(radical-critical ethics) 등은 거의 소개되지 못하고 있다. 따라서 향후 한국적 사회복지의 실정에 부합하는 사회복지윤리 및 철학의 모색은 이와 같은 현행 교과서들의 한계를 적극적으로 극복하는 방향과 내용으로 이루어져야 할 것이다. This article examines text books for course work of social work ethics and philosophy in Korean universities. After identifying the evidence of their common inclinations toward social work practice ethics developed along with American social work, the potential problems and limitation of this American social work-oriented ethics are explored. First, because most of text book are focusing on the ethical issues derived from the direct professional practice between individual social workers and clients, they are not offering necessary informations and guidelines for practice which are compatible with another ethical values and principles such as social justice, oppression, discrimination and social exclusion, which are more relevant to social policy and social service within European welfare state paradigm than clinical social work practice in America. Second, ethical theories considered as a theoretical resources for social work practice by text books are mainly normative or substantive ethical theories, which examines real practical ethical choices and reasoning that lie behind them. Such exclusive concerns about applied ethics make unable them to cover sufficiently both descriptive ethics and meta ethics, both of which can play an important role in establishing Korean social work practice ethics, and deepen the understanding of ethical decision-making models designed to solve ethical dilemmas and deadlock. Third, the text books has focused on only modernist professional ethics which is characterised in terms of a debate between Kantian and Utilitarian approaches. Thus, the alternative approaches recently developed in social work ethics such as feminist ethics, poststructural ethics, postmodern and critical ethics are totally neglected.

트루츠 렌토르프의 사회윤리의 근거로서 ‘교회성’에 대한 연구

최태관(Tae-Kwan Choi) 연세대학교 신과대학(연합신학대학원) 2016 신학논단 Vol.84 No.-

This thesis is the study of “kirchlichkeit” as the basis of social ethics by Trutz Rendtorff in the situation of european culture. “Kirchlichkeit” means the reality of god, which god as trinity reveals in the history of religions and in modern culture. Kirchlichkeit is the religious normativity of european culture. This concept is a event of intertextual understanding of religious and historical theology by semler, schleiermacher und of church dogmatics by k. barth. With this concept explains he, that his social ethics comes from hermeneutical theology and refers to the hermeneutical dogmatics and ethics. He tries to explain practical “kirchlichkeit”. What is practical “kirchlichkeit”? First, he regards “Kirchlichkeit” as identity. Man expresses with freedom identity and develops faith community. “Setting in Life” of christian faith is a historical and modern kontext, where church and theology the whole life of christian form. Rendtorff regards interpretation of “Setting in Life” of religious life the task of theology. Second, he defines “Kirchlichkeit” as individuality of christian faith in the european religious history and european culture. Theology is hermeneutics as localization in relation to churches dogmatics by karl barth. Here is church a room, where Gott appears as trinity. The subject of church is not mensch, but god. If god appears in the church, understands christian god as the basis of identity of christian faith. Church is a dogmatic form of freedom in society. Third is “Kirchlichkeit” the basis of social ethics. Because social ethics makes religious society with various forms to social body. It is a matter of political theology. Trutz Rendtorff emphasizes living together, mutual cognition, compromise, dissent care in public life, in order to reach consensus. Rendtorff emphasizes the interpretation of religious text and traditions and dialogue with other religions. This is a meaning of social ethics as perform of life. Finally has social ethics the formation of identity and Kirchlichkeit as task of korean theology. In the political situation of korea must develops the korean theology the method of dialogue between christianity and other religions for social responsibility. This thesis is the study of “kirchlichkeit” as the basis of social ethics by Trutz Rendtorff in the situation of european culture. “Kirchlichkeit” means the reality of god, which god as trinity reveals in the history of religions and in modern culture. Kirchlichkeit is the religious normativity of european culture. This concept is a event of intertextual understanding of religious and historical theology by semler, schleiermacher und of church dogmatics by k. barth. With this concept explains he, that his social ethics comes from hermeneutical theology and refers to the hermeneutical dogmatics and ethics. He tries to explain practical “kirchlichkeit”. What is practical “kirchlichkeit”? First, he regards “Kirchlichkeit” as identity. Man expresses with freedom identity and develops faith community. “Setting in Life” of christian faith is a historical and modern kontext, where church and theology the whole life of christian form. Rendtorff regards interpretation of “Setting in Life” of religious life the task of theology. Second, he defines “Kirchlichkeit” as individuality of christian faith in the european religious history and european culture. Theology is hermeneutics as localization in relation to churches dogmatics by karl barth. Here is church a room, where Gott appears as trinity. The subject of church is not mensch, but god. If god appears in the church, understands christian god as the basis of identity of christian faith. Church is a dogmatic form of freedom in society. Third is “Kirchlichkeit” the basis of social ethics. Because social ethics makes religious society with various forms to social body. It is a matter of political theology. Trutz Rendtorff emphasizes living together, mutual cognition, compromise, dissent care in public life, in order to reach consensus. Rendtorff emphasizes the interpretation of religious text and traditions and dialogue with other religions. This is a meaning of social ethics as perform of life. Finally has social ethics the formation of identity and Kirchlichkeit as task of korean theology. In the political situation of korea must develops the korean theology the method of dialogue between christianity and other religions for social responsibility.

“한국 기독교 사회윤리학”의 학문적 정위

노영상 한국기독교사회윤리학회 2009 기독교사회윤리 Vol.18 No.-

이 글에서 필자는 한국 기독교 사회윤리학의 개념을 정의하며 그 학문을 정위시키고자 하였다. 이 목적을 위하여 첫 번째로 학문성의 개념에 대해 분석하고, 그 학문성의 여섯 개의 조건에 대해 설명한 다음, 신학과 기독교윤리학이 그런 학문성의 조건을 만족시킴을 언급하였다. 두 번째로 미국의 기독교윤리학자 제임스 거스탑슨(James M. Gustafson)의 윤리에 대한 정의를 사용하여 기독교윤리학의 학문성에 대해 탐구하였다. 세 번째로 본 논문은 개인윤리와 다른 사회윤리의 영역에 대해 설명하면서, 기독교사회윤리학의 학문적 위치를 규명하려 하였다. 위와 같은 고찰을 거쳐, 필자는 “한국 기독교 사회윤리학” 개념을 다음과 같은 한 문장으로 정리하였다. : “한국 기독교 사회윤리학이란 나름의 기독교 사회윤리학적 방법론에 입각하여, 먼저 서구사회와 다른 한국사회의 독특한 상황에 대한 사회과학적 분석을 하며, 한국적 입장에서 일관되게 정리된 신앙과 신학을 가지고, 개인윤리의 영역으로는 해결될 수 없는 사회구조와 제도들의 개선과 사회정의 실현 및 사회변혁에 대해, 인간의 사회성을 강조하는 성경과 교리적 전통의 입장에서 반성하고, 나름의 사회윤리적 실천들에 대해 탐구하며, 이에 대해 우선은 다른 교단의 구성원들과 의견을 조율하고, 더 나아가 교회 밖의 사람들과의 소통을 통해 공적인 합의를 이룬 다음, 이를 바탕으로 하여 목회적이며 사회적인 실천을 책임성을 가지고 결단하고, 이러한 실천의 이행에 따른 결과를 평가 하는 바, 일군의 전문적인 기독교 사회윤리학자를 중심으로 전개되는, 신앙과 합리성의 양면을 겸비한 학문을 의미한다.” In this paper, I explored how we would define Korean Christian social ethics rightly. For this purpose, I analyzed the essential conditions of scholarship, firstly. After I referred six conditions of scholarship, I showed a learning as theology satisfied those conditions. Secondly, I examined the scholarship of Christian ethics, using the definition of Christian ethics by James M. Gustafson. Thirdly, this paper explained social ethics, distinguished from personal ethics. Especially, I said Christian ethicists had developed the inquiry of social ethics in advance of the philosophical ethicists. In conclusion, I defined Korean Christian social ethics by line as followings.: “Korean Christian social ethics is a study, having both sides of faith and rationality, done by the research groups such as professional Christian social ethical scholars with its own ethical methodology, which analyzes Korean social situations different from the west by the tool of social sciences, reflects on the improvement of the present social structure and social institutions, realizing social justice and transforming society not to be solved in the field of personal ethics, with faith and theology adjusted in a Korean point of view, in the perspective of the Bible and doctrinal traditions emphasizing human sociality, investigates the social ethical practices, tunes up different views of practices among various denominations, makes a public consensus through the communication with people outside of church, decides on the contents of ministerial and social practices with his own social responsibility, and evaluates the results following the practical implementation.”

미국 NASW 윤리강령의 변화과정 및 2018 개정의 함의

김성호(Kim, Seongho) 서강대학교 생명문화연구소 2018 생명연구 Vol.47 No.-

Ethical issues are the core principles of social welfare practice that have a great impact on social welfare identity, mission and practice as well as social welfare policy change in macro level. The National Social Workers Association (NASW) Code of Ethics, which was revised five times in the history of professional social welfare in the United States, reflects the social, economic, political, and philosophical circumstances of that time. in 2017, NASW approved a number of significant amendments to the NASW Code of Ethics. These changes went into effect January 1, 2018. The process of birth and change of the NASW Code of Ethics can be summarized in the following five themes. First, the process of change in the NASW Code of Ethics is the process and result of struggling to establish the professional identity of social workers with the historical emergence of social work as a profession. Second, the NASW Code of Ethics provides moral and ethical grounds for professional practice to social workers. Third, the NASW Code of Ethics is a legal domain that provides the basis for legal judgments relating to specific social work practice issues and practices. Fourth, the NASW Code of Ethics is a consensus of NASW on the political ideology that influenced the modeling, methodology and practice of social work. Fifth, the NASW Code of Ethics provides a remedy for the environment of a rapidly changing society. This study categorized the contents of the NASW s Code of Ethics and the changes of the period by primary data analysis and introduced the major contents. Based on the results of this study, practical implications for applying to social welfare in Korea were suggested.

미국 NASW 윤리강령의 변화과정 및 2018 개정의 함의

Kim Seong Ho 서강대학교 생명문화연구소 2018 생명연구 Vol.47 No.-

Ethical issues are the core principles of social welfare practice that have a great impact on social welfare identity, mission and practice as well as social welfare policy change in macro level. The National Social Workers' Association (NASW) Code of Ethics, which was revised five times in the history of professional social welfare in the United States, reflects the social, economic, political, and philosophical circumstances of that time. in 2017, NASW approved a number of significant amendments to the NASW Code of Ethics. These changes went into effect January 1, 2018. The process of birth and change of the NASW Code of Ethics can be summarized in the following five themes. First, the process of change in the NASW Code of Ethics is the process and result of struggling to establish the professional identity of social workers with the historical emergence of social work as a profession. Second, the NASW Code of Ethics provides moral and ethical grounds for professional practice to social workers. Third, the NASW Code of Ethics is a legal domain that provides the basis for legal judgments relating to specific social work practice issues and practices. Fourth, the NASW Code of Ethics is a consensus of NASW on the political ideology that influenced the modeling, methodology and practice of social work. Fifth, the NASW Code of Ethics provides a remedy for the environment of a rapidly changing society. This study categorized the contents of the NASW's Code of Ethics and the changes of the period by primary data analysis and introduced the major contents. Based on the results of this study, practical implications for applying to social welfare in Korea were suggested. 윤리적 이슈는 사회복지의 정체성과, 사명, 실천뿐만 아니라 거시적 차원에서도 사회복지정책의 변화에 커다란 영향을 미치는 사회복지실천의 핵심원리이다. 100여년이 조금 넘는 미국의 전문사회복지의 역사 속에서 다섯 번 개정된 전미사회사업가협회(NASW) 윤리강령은 당시의 사회, 경제, 정치, 철학적 상황을 반영한 것이다. 2018년 2월 미국 NASW는 윤리강령을 대폭 변경했다. 이는 두 차례의 소폭 개정을 제외하면 1996년 대 개정 이후 20여년만의 일이다. NASW 윤리강령의 탄생과 변화의 과정은 다음의 다섯 가지 주제로 요약할수 있다. 첫째, NASW 윤리강령의 변화과정은 전문직으로서의 사회사업의 역사적 출현과 더불어 사회사업가들의 직업적 정체성을 확립하기 위해 고군분투해온 과정과 그 결과이다. 둘째, NASW 윤리강령은 사회사업가들에게 전문직 실천을 위한 도덕적, 윤리적 근거를 제시한다. 셋째, NASW 윤리강령은 법적인 영역으로써 특정한 사회복지 실천 업무 이슈 및 사례와 관련한 법적판결의 기준을제공한다. 넷째, NASW 윤리강령은 사회사업의 모델과 방법론 그리고 실천방식을 형성하는데 영향을 미친 정치적 이념에 대한 NASW의 합의결정체이다. 다섯째, NASW 윤리강령은 급변하는 사회사업 현장의 환경에 대한 구제적인 실천방안을 제시한다. 본 연구는 NASW 윤리강령의 형성과 시대별 변화내용을 2018년 개정 윤리강령의 주요 변동사항에 대한 소개와 함께, 1차 자료 분석을 통해 범주화하고주요내용을 소개했다. 이러한 연구결과를 토대로 우리나라 사회복지에 적용하기위한 실천적 함의를 제시하였다.

교의학과 인문·사회과학에 대한 관계를 중심으로 살펴본 한국기독교사회윤리학의 학문적 위치

강원돈 한국기독교사회윤리학회 2009 기독교사회윤리 Vol.18 No.-

Christian social ethics make reflections on earnest attempts of the Christians to realize a better and more righteous life by regulating institutional things. Almost all relations of human beings to their inner lives, other persons and their environments are institutionalized; therefore there must be ethical approaches to these institutional aspects of human relationships from a Christian perspective. I define such attempts as Christian social ethics. In the article I would locate them in relation to dogmatics and to human and social sciences. Firstly, I deny the traditional thesis that ethics are defined as tasks of dogmatics, as Karl Barth has asserted it strongly. Even if Christian social ethics interpret institutions from a dogmatic perspective, such interpretations cannot take the place of analytical approaches to the reality of institutions. Christian social ethics stand on their own feet if they use dogmatics autonomously in articulating theological foundations of their ethical principles. Secondly, Christian social ethics can find out the place to integrate human and social scientific analyses of reality into ethical reflections if they distinguish criteria of ethical judgment from maxims of ethical praxis. The former is concerned in the transparence of the world to the kingdom of God and it must make clear what should be done in such a perspective. In the meanwhile the latter is, even in the vision of the Kingdom of God, rather interested in suggesting guidelines or alternative concepts to regulate institutional things under historical conditions of reality. In such connections Christian social ethics cannot escape from analyzing institutional realities with help of human and social sciences. Thirdly, Christian social ethics must be selective in using human and social scientific analyses of reality. They accept human and social sciences which can help to disclose ideological disguises, to break superstitions of laws which are suggested to be prevalent in history and society, to be responsible for the future and to promote democracy and public integrity through discourses in the civil society. 기독교사회윤리학은 제도적인 것을 규율함으로써 보던 선하고 보다 정의로운 삶을 실현하고자 하는 기독교인들의 진지한 노력을 성찰하는 것을 그 과제로 한다. 인간이 자기 자신과 다른 사람들, 그리고 환경과 맺고 있는 관계들은 제도화되어 있기에 기독교적 관점에서 인간관계들의 제도적인 측면에 윤리학적인 접근을 할 필요가 있다. 나는 이러한 윤리학적 시도를 기독교사회윤리학이라고 규정한다. 이러한 전제 아래서 나는 한편으로는 교의학과의 관계에서, 또 다른 한편으로는 인문·사회과학과의 관계에서 기독교사회윤리학의 학문적 위상을 정립하고자 한다. 첫째, 나는 칼 바르트가 강력하게 주장한 바와 같이 윤리학을 교의학의 과제로 보는 전통적인 관점을 부정한다. 기독교사회윤리학이 교의학적 관점에서 제도를 해석한다 할지라도, 이러한 해석은 제도 현실에 대한 분석적 접근을 대신할 수 없다. 기독교사회윤리학은 윤리학적 원칙들의 신학적 근거를 명료하게 밝히고자 하는 맥락에서 교의학을 자기 나름대로 활용하여야 한다. 둘째, 기독교사회윤리학은 윤리적 판단의 규준과 윤리적 행위의 준칙을 구별함으로써 인문·사회과학적 현실분석을 윤리학적 성찰에 통합하는 적절한 장소를 발견할 수 있다. 윤리적 판단의 규준은 세상이 하나님 나라에 투명하게 되도록 하는 데 관심을 기울이며, 따라서 이러한 관점에서 당위적인 것을 규명하고자 한다. 반면에 윤리적 행위의 규준은 하나님 나라를 지향하면서도 역사적 현실 조건들 아래서 제도적인 것을 규율하는 지침이나 대안적 구상을 제시하는 데 초점을 맞추기 때문에 인문·사회과학의 도움을 받으며 제도적인 현실을 분석하는 일을 피할 수 없다. 셋째, 기독교사회윤리학은 인문·사회과학적 현실분석을 선택적으로 활용할 수 있어야 한다. 기독교사회윤리학은 이데올로기적 가면들을 폭로하고, 역사와 사회를 지배한다고 참칭하는 법칙들에 대한 미신을 타파하고, 미래에 대한 책임을 촉진하고, 시민사회의 담론을 통하여 민주주의와 공공성을 구현하는 데 이바지하는 인문·사회과학의 통찰을 수용할 것이다.

사회복지 가치와 윤리에 대한 연구

최명주 한국인간복지실천학회 2011 한국인간복지실천연구 Vol.6 No.-

Ethics should be kept within the family for the right role of family. Likewise, awareness about social welfare in ethics and education should be prerequisite for the welfare of society. The field of social welfare deals with men called clients, placing the greatest value in satisfying basic needs of human beings and realizing human life. Therefore, social welfare center performs the role of providing people with specialized and vocational skills for influencing the life of clients in the social aspect. Thus, the performance of social welfare work is the continuation of human conflict and it is not an exaggeration to say that it is a consecutive process of selection and decision because this center should do ethical decision-making for a lot of cases and clients. While value is a matter of what is good and what is desirable, ethics is concerned with what is right and what is correct. In other words, ethics deals with the judgment on right things and wrong things, while value deals with what we like or dislike. Therefore, value is faith, and ethics is judgment. Based on these concepts, social workers decide their behaviors. Korea Association of Social Workers provides a declaration of social workers and ethics codes of social workers based on ideas of humanism and egalitarianism under the faith of respect for all human beings, inherent right for freedom, security of living right, and the realization of social justice, equality, freedom, and democratic value. Therefore, social workers always keep in mind these principles, and tried to keep them. These principles are not the only solutions to all conflicting situations in the field of social welfare. However, it is certain that they are conducive to setting the standards of judgment in the conflicting situation of ethics. Social workers always should observe ethical responsibility and principles as professional workers, and they try to do their best for their clients and society together with their coworkers. 한 가정이 바로 서기 위해서는 가정 내 윤리가 바로서야 한다. 이렇듯 한 나라의 복지가 바로서기 위해서는 사회복지에 대한 윤리의식과 교육이 바로 세워져야 한다. 사회복지라는 분야는 클라이언트라고 호칭하는 인간을 다루고 있으며 이러한 인간의 기본 욕구를 충족시키고 그들의 잠재능력과 개성을 최대한 살려 인간다운 삶을 실현시키는 목표를 최대 가치로 두고 있으며, 사회복지기관은 이러한 클라이언트의 삶에 영향을 주기 위해서 전문적이고 직업적인 기술을 제공하도록 사회적으로 위임받은 곳이라고 할 수 있다. 따라서 사회복지업무 수행은 인간적인 갈등의 연속이며 선택과 결정의 연속적인 과정이라고 해도 과언이 아니다. 항상 많은 클라이언트와 사례를 접하면서 윤리적 의사결정을 해야 하기 때문이다. 가치란 무엇이 좋고(good) 바람직한지(desirable)에 관심을 두는 반면, 윤리란 무엇이 옳고(right) 바른지(correct)에 관심을 둔다. 즉, 윤리가 옳고 그른가에 대한 판단을 다룬다면 가치는 좋고 싫은가에 대한 것으로서 가치가 믿음이라면 윤리는 판단이라 할 수 있다. 이를 바탕으로 사회복지사는 자신의 행동을 결정한다. 이에 한국사회복지사협회에서는 사회복지사의 선서 및 사회복지사의 윤리강령 등을 제공하여 사회복지사가 인본주의․평등주의 사상에 기초하여, 모든 인간의 존엄성과 가치존중, 천부의 자유권과 생존권의 보장, 사회정의와 평등․자유와 민주주의 가치를 실현함을 일반적 원칙으로 믿고 판단하기를 권장하고 있는 것이다. 따라서 사회복지사는 항상 이에 대하여 숙지하고 있어야 하며 최소한 가까이에 두고 지키도록 해야 한다. 물론, 이 강령이 모든 사회복지의 현장에서의 갈등상황에서 해결책이 되지는 않겠지만 윤리적 갈등상황에서 판단의 기준을 세우는데 도움을 줄 것은 확실하다. 사회복지사는 언제나 전문가로서 윤리적 책임과 원칙을 준수해야 하며 클라이언트에 대한 윤리적 책임과 원칙을 다하며 동료들과도 윤리적 책임 준수에 힘써야 하며 사회에 대한 윤리적 책임을 다하도록 최선의 노력을 다해야 할 것이다.

니버의 사회윤리에 관한 공공신학적 해석

문시영 한국기독교사회윤리학회 2008 기독교사회윤리 Vol.16 No.-

There are so many studies on Christian social ethics of R. Niebuhr. This paper is a proposal of new interpretation which concerns on his public perspective. Especially, this paper based on public theology of Max. L. Stackhouse. With this subject, this paper has some clues: (1) L. Rasmussen's view on Niebuhr as a public theologian or a theologian of public life, (2) M. Marty's guide Niebuhr as a public theologian, (3) Max. L. Stackhouse's Niebuhrian approach to Christian social ethics. On these basis, this paper tried to regard Niebuhr as an origin of public theology in contemporary meaning. Moreover, this paper applies Korean theologian Koh Bumseo's view of Niebuhr's Christian social ethics. According to Koh, Niebuhr has three points of view on social ethics: (1) Christian social ethics have to concern for social realities. (2) Christian social ethics must pursue the approximation of agape through social justice. (3) Christian social ethics have to treat the social structure as an important factor. Now, this paper mixed some clues of Rasmussen, Marty, and Stackhouse's view points and Koh's insights to understand Niebuhrian concept of Christian social ethics. So, this paper has focus on three points: (1) Niebuhr's concern for social realities could be connected with the anti-sectarian approach of public theology. (2) Niebuhr's concern for social justice could be connected with the concept of public concern of church in public theology. (3) Niebuhr's emphasis on social structure bears the concern for the political-economic structures in public theology. In conclusion, this paper proposed a possibility to interpret Niebuhr as a forerunner of public theology, the Christian social ethics in global era.